Inclusivity or Polical Bias - Is Crypto Free? Crypto Rantings of a Mad Man

By Betasyndicate.eth | betasyndicate.eth | 12 Aug 2025

To Be or Not to Be: The Question for Crypto Inclusivity

Back in the early days of Bitcoin, the ideals of inclusivity were just starting to take shape. Then came Ethereum and other projects like DigiByte, bringing with them talk of smart contracts, dApps, and a whole new ecosystem of chains and opportunities. It seemed like a new frontier, a brave oasis where technology could open the world, with wealth flowing freely across borders and changing the very construct of what was possible. Yet, somewhere along the way, we lost a piece of ourselves.

The Erosion of Ideals

Since the mid-2010s, the vision of a truly inclusive blockchain has been tainted by a growing current of regional and social divisions. The conversations I’ve had within the crypto space have, on multiple occasions, been marred by racism and prejudice. It feels like the industry, which once prided itself on global unity, has been fractured by finger-pointing and the loss of honor. The opportunity to unite seems lost, replaced by questions of where a person is from or what their beliefs are.

I recall sitting in 2018, listening to people I once respected express blatant hatred toward India. Another time, in 2017, I resigned as a marketing strategy manager for a rapidly growing chain after the CEO made comments about the color of someone's skin. I also once pulled the plug on a marketing contract over racial slurs directed at a founder's business and blockchain.

This is a stark contrast to the original voices of the industry: people like Jared Tate of DigiByte who spoke of open inclusion, Tommy Worldpower on the promise of cross-border wealth transference, and Vitalik Buterin who envisioned people in underprivileged nations using his technology to build better lives.

Despite these noble beginnings, we now see a constant stream of hateful projects run by ethnically aligned teams who refuse to collaborate with others based on nationality or religious affiliation. The promise of what blockchain was meant to be now rings hollow. Why has an innovation intended to unite the world become a breeding ground for disdain and exclusivity? It is the complete opposite of what Satoshi Nakamoto had in mind when he created Bitcoin.

The New Barriers to Entry

We have lost our way in the pursuit of greed and in the consistency of making money over following the path set before us at the start of Bitcoin.

Where there was once opportunity for all, we have built walls, creating an exclusive, developer-filled monopoly. A true project launch now takes hundreds of thousands—even millions—of dollars, making it nearly impossible for new talent to break through. You can no longer simply mint a coin and hope for discovery. Getting noticed requires paying for extensive advertising, publications, community management, and often, auditing firms or exchanges just to get your project a fair shot.

What were once fundamental principles are now rocky shores of distrust. The oasis has shrunk, dismantled and distilled into a burning pile of regurgitated garbage. We are witnessing rug pulls, useless apps, and "shitcoin" pump-and-dump schemes on platforms like Solana. It's an opportunistic and abusive market that preys on people who are hungry for the promise that crypto once held. Their money is taken for empty promises, and they are left with nothing but a gamble on their screens.

The Challenge of Political Tribalism

The divisive nature of politics has also seeped into the very sanctum of what was meant to be an inclusive space. The promise of a level playing field is now overshadowed by political loyalties and tribalism. The rise of politically-aligned memecoins exemplifies this, where projects are judged not on their merit or technology, but on their support for, or opposition to, a specific political figure. This creates an environment where certain projects, regardless of their potential, are destined to fail simply because they don't align with the majority's political beliefs.

This is a monster of our own making—a system that cares less about opportunity and more about being opportunistic and abusive. It's a money-making machine that has stripped away the initial promise of crypto and replaced it with a broken system that benefits the few at the expense of the many. What was supposed to be the great equalizer has become just another tool for division.

The irony is brutal, isn't it? A technology created to free us from centralized control and traditional banking—to break down walls—has instead built new ones, meticulously crafted by the very people who claimed to be revolutionaries. We've traded the old guard for a new one, a new kind of gatekeeper that demands allegiance, not to an ideal, but to a team, a nationality, or a political agenda. The decree of blockchain, inclusion and equality, meant to be a great equalizer, in reality has become a reflection of humanity's worst tribal instincts. What was open is now closed.

So, where do we go from here?

We either continue sailing this sinking ship, bickering over which lifeboat belongs to which group, or we grab a bucket and start bailing water together. The responsibility falls on us—the developers, the advisors, the writers, and the users who remember the initial promise. We must demand better from our communities. We must reject the projects that are nothing more than digital echo chambers. The true revolution won't come from a new line of code; it will come from a return to principle.

Perhaps this is all just a dream. My dream is to get on a catamaran with my wife and sail away from all this noise, a dream built on the very principles of freedom and independence that this industry was founded on. A dream that feels more and more necessary every day as the oasis of opportunity shrinks. The blockchain was supposed to be our vessel to a better world, but right now, it feels less like a ship and more like a cesspool. It's time to decide if we want to build a better boat or just watch this one sink.